Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
27
Case 1:04-cv-00152-GCM Document 27 Filed 01/18/2006 Page 1 of 8
JONATHAN L. HENSLEE )
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
(FNU) LEWIS, Lieutenant )
at the Rutherford )
County Jail; and )
(FNU) YOUNG, Employee at ) O R D E R
the Rutherford County )
Jail. )
Defendants. )
_________________________)
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on remand from the Fourth
Dockets.Justia.com
Case 1:04-cv-00152-GCM Document 27 Filed 01/18/2006 Page 2 of 8
failed to allege that he had suffered any injury from having been
the Court found that the plaintiff had failed to allege that he
conduct.
Court noted that it could not even conclude that the subject
of limitations.
Court of Appeals.
2
Case 1:04-cv-00152-GCM Document 27 Filed 01/18/2006 Page 3 of 8
917 F.2d 1302 (4th Cir. 1990), that allegations of mere threats
Further, the appellate Court pointed out that this Court was
found, in reliance upon Gordon v. Leake, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th
achieve justice), that this Court should have allowed the plain-
3
Case 1:04-cv-00152-GCM Document 27 Filed 01/18/2006 Page 4 of 8
was not set forth in the plaintiff’s Complaint, but rather was
to the extent that such ruling suggests that district courts must
4
Case 1:04-cv-00152-GCM Document 27 Filed 01/18/2006 Page 5 of 8
Court finds that this request must be denied. Indeed, the law is
5
Case 1:04-cv-00152-GCM Document 27 Filed 01/18/2006 Page 6 of 8
generally Whisenant v. Yaum, 739 F.2d 160, 163 (4th Cir. 1984)
from the bar only when it is apparent that the pro se litigant
claim. Gordon v. Leeke, 575 F.2d 1147 (4th Cir. 1978), rev’d on
other grounds, Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296
6
Case 1:04-cv-00152-GCM Document 27 Filed 01/18/2006 Page 7 of 8
to dismissal.
is DENIED.
parties.
SO ORDERED.
7
Case 1:04-cv-00152-GCM Document 27 Filed 01/18/2006 Page 8 of 8